150 YEARS AGO THIS WEEK 16 - 22 SEPTEMBER 1874
This week's many stories include the naked baby from Bold Street that was left alone on wet straw, the introduction of exchange and mart in newspapers, the dangers of accidentally walking into heaps of nightsoil, the high mounds of chemical waste in Langtree Street, the woman who bashed a grocer with her broom, the carter prosecuted for allowing his hand cart to stand in Bridge Street and two St Helens firms deny allowing acid to flow into the public sewers despite evidence to the contrary.
The St Helens Newspaper had long published what we would call a classified section devoted to categories such as "Situations Vacant". There was also a "For Sale" section containing expensive items that businesses wanted to be rid of, such as engines. But there was no facility for ordinary folk to flog their unwanted stuff. However, the Newspaper of the 19th described how they would be introducing such a facility, which they were calling "Sale or Exchange Mart".
In this, they said, their readers could advertise items that they no longer wanted, such as books, ornaments, instruments etc., explaining: "In various parts of the country the experiment has been tried and found successful. We have been requested to adopt a similar plan for this town and neighbourhood. We have therefore agreed to make the experiment, under the following regulations:-
"That descriptions of the articles to be disposed of will be inserted in this column at Sixpence each. If a sale or exchange is effected, a small consideration will have to be paid. Articles may remain with the owners, or be deposited at this office. The names of owners will not be given without their consent."
And what was the first item for sale or exchange in the new column? Appropriately for these violent times, it was a double-barrelled gun! That was all the information that was provided in the ad with no details as to the age and condition of the weapon or its price. But it was a start in what would prove a valuable means in which the St Helens public could offload their unwanted stuff. Gun ownership, by the way, was then unregulated. That was apart from the need to buy a licence from the post office, like you would for your dog.
Last week I reported how the St Helens Chemical Company of Pocket Nook had written to the council's Health Committee denying that "any noxious matter" ever flowed from their factory into public sewers. But the Borough Surveyor John Ross had taken samples from the sewer connected to their works and detected acid.
As a result of the firm's complete denial, this week's meeting of the committee heard that a further sample from the sewer had been taken and that had contained a much larger percentage of acid than the first sample had. The manager of the chemical company still insisted they were not responsible – but explained how they were about to adopt a new system that would prevent "all forms of escape" from their works.
"It's not us, guv", was essentially the standard response of polluting firms when brought to book. But the Health Committee's chairman told his members that he did not accept the denial and saw their statement of a new system being introduced as an admission of culpability.
Also in the firing line was Doulton's Pottery who had sent in a lengthy letter to the committee disputing their surveyor's report that they were polluting the sewers. In response Mr Ross showed the committee members a map that illustrated the layout of the town's sewer system and its branches.
But in the end the matter was passed on to the Town Clerk for him to "take such course as the circumstances justify", although he felt that nothing could be done to deal with the mere running of acid into a sewer unless a nuisance could be proven. And Dr McNicholl, the Medical Officer of Health, felt that acid in the sewers was not a nuisance unless it came into contact with other bodies to form sulphureted hydrogen.
During the discussion it was mentioned in passing that the mounds of chemical waste dumped in Langtree Street were now almost as high as those in Greenbank. Andrew Kurtz's firm – known in St Helens as the Sutton Alkali Works and pictured above – was said to be responsible for "rapidly" depositing the waste on the land in Langtree Street that he owned.
Most of that road became Jackson Street and the ugly mounds were known as the Kimmicks – as did the hills of waste off Borough Road on the edge of Greenbank. It was pointed out that the Corporation could take action against Kurtz if the mounds were considered injurious to public health but the Jackson Street waste would not be removed for 100 years.
Last October the Health Committee had decided that all new houses built in the borough must be provided with covered ashpits and removable ashtubs, "according to the pail system". The pail was a portable bucket that was situated in an outhouse or shed and positioned under a toilet seat.
The contents of the bucket (called nightsoil) were emptied by the local authority at night and sold off at auction for composting into fertiliser. It was a step away from the flush toilet but a step up from unsanitary closets and middens that were then standard in St Helens. At this week's meeting the surveyor John Ross was asked for an update on the sanitary situation in St Helens but had to admit that he had largely ignored the committee's order.
Although between 12 and 20 houses had been converted to use the pail system, he said he had not insisted on new property that was being built in distant parts of the town adopting it. That, he said, was on account of the great expense and trouble the removal of nightsoil from those places would entail. The committee members gave Ross a bit of a ticking off for his failure but he then said he would need a covered van (horse-drawn, of course) to take away and empty all the pails and so the committee decided to invite tenders for one.
The streets of St Helens were then extremely dark at night and you needed to be very careful what you trod in, as there was much more than dog dirt about! The meeting also discussed two complaints that had been made claiming compensation for clothing that had been damaged by inadvertently walking into nightsoil. Charles Rigby had been going home a few nights before and in attempting to get to his house he had walked into a heap of human faeces from neighbouring houses that were awaiting collection by the nightsoil men.
I suppose a modern-day parallel would be households putting out their wheelie bins and recycling bags. But with poor street lighting Rigby had been caught unawares without smelling or seeing any of it before his immersion, as the Newspaper explained: "It did not appear that the nightsoil had given him that disagreeable notice which usually issues from it, and there was no light to reveal its presence."
Rigby's trousers and boots had got covered in the sh*t and he claimed had been ruined and a Mr Sanders also complained of experiencing the same problem in Ormskirk Street. The committee decided that both complaints should be referred to the Town Clerk for him to sort out. Recently it had been decided that the nightsoilmen should be issued with lights so residents could realise who they were. But it sounds like it was the nightsoil itself that required illumination.
The Health Committee was also given the latest figures on death for the month ending September 12th. There had been 139 fatalities in St Helens of which 20 were from scarlet fever, 4 from measles, diphtheria had claimed 3 lives and diarrhoea 16. Eighty-five of the deaths were of children under five years of age, with half of them under 12 months.
Small shops survived on giving tick to their customers who would normally pay off their debts when their husband received his weekly wage on Saturday lunchtime. But, of course, not everyone did. In this week's Petty Sessions, Edward Poynton charged Lilly Friar with assault after she had bashed the grocer with her broom. Mr Poynton had gone to the woman's house to seek some money that he was owed.
When Mrs Friar said she couldn't pay off her debt the grocer got angry with her, which led to the assault. In her defence the brush-bashing Mrs Friar claimed that her violence had been justified by an "improper intent" on the part of the complainant. But she was fined five shillings and costs.
I've often commented how carters were not allowed to leave their horse and cart and – in later years – motor cars on the streets of St Helens for longer than it took to load or unload goods. That was because an obstruction might be created. But the next case demonstrated how the rule also applied to smaller, hand-powered vehicles.
Patrick Bailey appeared in court charged with allowing his cart to stand in Bridge Street for two hours. Although Mr Bailey admitted the offence, he said his vehicle was only a small handcart and he was just fined 1 shilling and costs.
The most serious case in my view this week concerned Margaret Bradley of Bold Street who was charged with neglecting her 9-week-old child. Ann Barrett said Margaret and her husband lodged with her and at some time between 8am and 9am on one morning she had heard the child crying. Upon entering the Bradleys' room, she said she found the baby on its own lying naked on some wet straw.
Mrs Barrett added that the child's mother had been out of the house for about an hour and a half. A neighbour called Bridget Bannon gave evidence with what was reported as "manifest reluctance" and stated that on that morning Margaret had spent half-an-hour in her home.
Superintendent Ludlam asked Mrs Bannon if she was aware of the defendant's regular neglect of her child. She said she was not but had to admit once carrying the infant to the police station to complain about lack of attention from its mother.
Dr McNicoll said that after examination of the child he had found the baby to be in an "ill condition" but not seemingly diseased. "It has been badly cared [for], but not grossly neglected. It would certainly be injurious to leave the child an hour and a half as stated." Sgt Eastham told the court that after being summoned to the house he had found the infant screaming on a wet bed, with the baby's hands pressed to its mouth.
The mother of the poor child, Margaret Bradley, offered no defence other than to deny that it had been left naked. The magistrates sent the woman to prison for three weeks with her child ordered to be admitted into the workhouse. After the woman had completed her sentence, the pair would, no doubt, have been reunited but without any supervision.
The father was only mentioned in passing as living in the lodgings with Margaret. Presumably he had been at work when his child was left alone. As far as the authorities were concerned the husband's responsibility for his family lay in earning a living and finding them a home. Caring for his children was the wife's responsibility and she usually was the one that carried the can when things went wrong.
St Helens Newspaper courtesy St Helens Archive Service at Eccleston Library
Next Week's stories will include Rainford's poor water supply, the pubs that had their licences removed, the movement calling for compulsory education and the giant dying of fever that still managed to visit pubs on his way to Whiston Workhouse.
The St Helens Newspaper had long published what we would call a classified section devoted to categories such as "Situations Vacant". There was also a "For Sale" section containing expensive items that businesses wanted to be rid of, such as engines. But there was no facility for ordinary folk to flog their unwanted stuff. However, the Newspaper of the 19th described how they would be introducing such a facility, which they were calling "Sale or Exchange Mart".
In this, they said, their readers could advertise items that they no longer wanted, such as books, ornaments, instruments etc., explaining: "In various parts of the country the experiment has been tried and found successful. We have been requested to adopt a similar plan for this town and neighbourhood. We have therefore agreed to make the experiment, under the following regulations:-
"That descriptions of the articles to be disposed of will be inserted in this column at Sixpence each. If a sale or exchange is effected, a small consideration will have to be paid. Articles may remain with the owners, or be deposited at this office. The names of owners will not be given without their consent."
And what was the first item for sale or exchange in the new column? Appropriately for these violent times, it was a double-barrelled gun! That was all the information that was provided in the ad with no details as to the age and condition of the weapon or its price. But it was a start in what would prove a valuable means in which the St Helens public could offload their unwanted stuff. Gun ownership, by the way, was then unregulated. That was apart from the need to buy a licence from the post office, like you would for your dog.
Last week I reported how the St Helens Chemical Company of Pocket Nook had written to the council's Health Committee denying that "any noxious matter" ever flowed from their factory into public sewers. But the Borough Surveyor John Ross had taken samples from the sewer connected to their works and detected acid.
As a result of the firm's complete denial, this week's meeting of the committee heard that a further sample from the sewer had been taken and that had contained a much larger percentage of acid than the first sample had. The manager of the chemical company still insisted they were not responsible – but explained how they were about to adopt a new system that would prevent "all forms of escape" from their works.
"It's not us, guv", was essentially the standard response of polluting firms when brought to book. But the Health Committee's chairman told his members that he did not accept the denial and saw their statement of a new system being introduced as an admission of culpability.
Also in the firing line was Doulton's Pottery who had sent in a lengthy letter to the committee disputing their surveyor's report that they were polluting the sewers. In response Mr Ross showed the committee members a map that illustrated the layout of the town's sewer system and its branches.
But in the end the matter was passed on to the Town Clerk for him to "take such course as the circumstances justify", although he felt that nothing could be done to deal with the mere running of acid into a sewer unless a nuisance could be proven. And Dr McNicholl, the Medical Officer of Health, felt that acid in the sewers was not a nuisance unless it came into contact with other bodies to form sulphureted hydrogen.
Most of that road became Jackson Street and the ugly mounds were known as the Kimmicks – as did the hills of waste off Borough Road on the edge of Greenbank. It was pointed out that the Corporation could take action against Kurtz if the mounds were considered injurious to public health but the Jackson Street waste would not be removed for 100 years.
Last October the Health Committee had decided that all new houses built in the borough must be provided with covered ashpits and removable ashtubs, "according to the pail system". The pail was a portable bucket that was situated in an outhouse or shed and positioned under a toilet seat.
The contents of the bucket (called nightsoil) were emptied by the local authority at night and sold off at auction for composting into fertiliser. It was a step away from the flush toilet but a step up from unsanitary closets and middens that were then standard in St Helens. At this week's meeting the surveyor John Ross was asked for an update on the sanitary situation in St Helens but had to admit that he had largely ignored the committee's order.
Although between 12 and 20 houses had been converted to use the pail system, he said he had not insisted on new property that was being built in distant parts of the town adopting it. That, he said, was on account of the great expense and trouble the removal of nightsoil from those places would entail. The committee members gave Ross a bit of a ticking off for his failure but he then said he would need a covered van (horse-drawn, of course) to take away and empty all the pails and so the committee decided to invite tenders for one.
The streets of St Helens were then extremely dark at night and you needed to be very careful what you trod in, as there was much more than dog dirt about! The meeting also discussed two complaints that had been made claiming compensation for clothing that had been damaged by inadvertently walking into nightsoil. Charles Rigby had been going home a few nights before and in attempting to get to his house he had walked into a heap of human faeces from neighbouring houses that were awaiting collection by the nightsoil men.
I suppose a modern-day parallel would be households putting out their wheelie bins and recycling bags. But with poor street lighting Rigby had been caught unawares without smelling or seeing any of it before his immersion, as the Newspaper explained: "It did not appear that the nightsoil had given him that disagreeable notice which usually issues from it, and there was no light to reveal its presence."
Rigby's trousers and boots had got covered in the sh*t and he claimed had been ruined and a Mr Sanders also complained of experiencing the same problem in Ormskirk Street. The committee decided that both complaints should be referred to the Town Clerk for him to sort out. Recently it had been decided that the nightsoilmen should be issued with lights so residents could realise who they were. But it sounds like it was the nightsoil itself that required illumination.
The Health Committee was also given the latest figures on death for the month ending September 12th. There had been 139 fatalities in St Helens of which 20 were from scarlet fever, 4 from measles, diphtheria had claimed 3 lives and diarrhoea 16. Eighty-five of the deaths were of children under five years of age, with half of them under 12 months.
Small shops survived on giving tick to their customers who would normally pay off their debts when their husband received his weekly wage on Saturday lunchtime. But, of course, not everyone did. In this week's Petty Sessions, Edward Poynton charged Lilly Friar with assault after she had bashed the grocer with her broom. Mr Poynton had gone to the woman's house to seek some money that he was owed.
When Mrs Friar said she couldn't pay off her debt the grocer got angry with her, which led to the assault. In her defence the brush-bashing Mrs Friar claimed that her violence had been justified by an "improper intent" on the part of the complainant. But she was fined five shillings and costs.
I've often commented how carters were not allowed to leave their horse and cart and – in later years – motor cars on the streets of St Helens for longer than it took to load or unload goods. That was because an obstruction might be created. But the next case demonstrated how the rule also applied to smaller, hand-powered vehicles.
Patrick Bailey appeared in court charged with allowing his cart to stand in Bridge Street for two hours. Although Mr Bailey admitted the offence, he said his vehicle was only a small handcart and he was just fined 1 shilling and costs.
The most serious case in my view this week concerned Margaret Bradley of Bold Street who was charged with neglecting her 9-week-old child. Ann Barrett said Margaret and her husband lodged with her and at some time between 8am and 9am on one morning she had heard the child crying. Upon entering the Bradleys' room, she said she found the baby on its own lying naked on some wet straw.
Mrs Barrett added that the child's mother had been out of the house for about an hour and a half. A neighbour called Bridget Bannon gave evidence with what was reported as "manifest reluctance" and stated that on that morning Margaret had spent half-an-hour in her home.
Superintendent Ludlam asked Mrs Bannon if she was aware of the defendant's regular neglect of her child. She said she was not but had to admit once carrying the infant to the police station to complain about lack of attention from its mother.
Dr McNicoll said that after examination of the child he had found the baby to be in an "ill condition" but not seemingly diseased. "It has been badly cared [for], but not grossly neglected. It would certainly be injurious to leave the child an hour and a half as stated." Sgt Eastham told the court that after being summoned to the house he had found the infant screaming on a wet bed, with the baby's hands pressed to its mouth.
The mother of the poor child, Margaret Bradley, offered no defence other than to deny that it had been left naked. The magistrates sent the woman to prison for three weeks with her child ordered to be admitted into the workhouse. After the woman had completed her sentence, the pair would, no doubt, have been reunited but without any supervision.
The father was only mentioned in passing as living in the lodgings with Margaret. Presumably he had been at work when his child was left alone. As far as the authorities were concerned the husband's responsibility for his family lay in earning a living and finding them a home. Caring for his children was the wife's responsibility and she usually was the one that carried the can when things went wrong.
St Helens Newspaper courtesy St Helens Archive Service at Eccleston Library
Next Week's stories will include Rainford's poor water supply, the pubs that had their licences removed, the movement calling for compulsory education and the giant dying of fever that still managed to visit pubs on his way to Whiston Workhouse.
This week's many stories include the naked baby from Bold Street that was left alone on wet straw, the introduction of exchange and mart in newspapers, the dangers of accidentally walking into heaps of nightsoil, the high mounds of chemical waste in Langtree Street, the woman who bashed a grocer with her broom, the carter prosecuted for allowing his hand cart to stand in Bridge Street and two St Helens firms deny allowing acid to flow into the public sewers despite evidence to the contrary.
The St Helens Newspaper had long published what we would call a classified section devoted to categories such as "Situations Vacant".
There was also a "For Sale" section containing expensive items that businesses wanted to be rid off, such as engines. But there was no facility for ordinary folk to flog their unwanted stuff.
However, the Newspaper of the 19th described how they would be introducing such a facility, which they were calling "Sale or Exchange Mart".
In this, they said, their readers could advertise items that they no longer wanted, such as books, ornaments, instruments etc., explaining:
"In various parts of the country the experiment has been tried and found successful. We have been requested to adopt a similar plan for this town and neighbourhood. We have therefore agreed to make the experiment, under the following regulations:-
"That descriptions of the articles to be disposed of will be inserted in this column at Sixpence each.
"If a sale or exchange is effected, a small consideration will have to be paid. Articles may remain with the owners, or be deposited at this office. The names of owners will not be given without their consent."
And what was the first item for sale or exchange in the new column? Appropriately for these violent times, it was a double-barrelled gun!
That was all the information that was provided in the ad with no details as to the age and condition of the weapon or its price.
But it was a start in what would prove a valuable means in which the St Helens public could offload their unwanted stuff.
Gun ownership, by the way, was then unregulated. That was apart from the need to buy a licence from the post office, like you would for your dog.
Last week I reported how the St Helens Chemical Company of Pocket Nook had written to the council's Health Committee denying that "any noxious matter" ever flowed from their factory into public sewers.
But the Borough Surveyor John Ross had taken samples from the sewer connected to their works and detected acid.
As a result of the firm's complete denial, this week's meeting of the committee heard that a further sample from the sewer had been taken and that had contained a much larger percentage of acid than the first sample had.
The manager of the chemical company still insisted they were not responsible – but explained how they were about to adopt a new system that would prevent "all forms of escape" from their works.
"It's not us, guv", was essentially the standard response of polluting firms when brought to book.
But the Health Committee's chairman told his members that he did not accept the denial and saw their statement of a new system being introduced as an admission of culpability.
Also in the firing line was Doulton's Pottery who had sent in a lengthy letter to the committee disputing their surveyor's report that they were polluting the sewers.
In response Mr Ross showed the committee members a map that illustrated the layout of the town's sewer system and its branches.
But in the end the matter was passed on to the Town Clerk for him to "take such course as the circumstances justify", although he felt that nothing could be done to deal with the mere running of acid into a sewer unless a nuisance could be proven.
And Dr McNicholl, the Medical Officer of Health, felt that acid in the sewers was not a nuisance unless it came into contact with other bodies to form sulphureted hydrogen.
During the discussion it was mentioned in passing that the mounds of chemical waste dumped in Langtree Street were now almost as high as those in Greenbank.
Andrew Kurtz's firm – known in St Helens as the Sutton Alkali Works and pictured above – was said to be responsible for "rapidly" depositing the waste on the land in Langtree Street that he owned.
Most of that road became Jackson Street and the ugly mounds were known as the Kimmicks – as did the hills of waste off Borough Road on the edge of Greenbank.
It was pointed out that the Corporation could take action against Kurtz if the mounds were considered injurious to public health but the Jackson Street waste would not be removed for 100 years.
Last October the Health Committee had decided that all new houses built in the borough must be provided with covered ashpits and removable ashtubs, "according to the pail system".
The pail was a portable bucket that was situated in an outhouse or shed and positioned under a toilet seat.
The contents of the bucket (called nightsoil) were emptied by the local authority at night and sold off at auction for composting into fertiliser.
It was a step away from the flush toilet but a step up from unsanitary closets and middens that were then standard in St Helens.
At this week's meeting the surveyor John Ross was asked for an update on the sanitary situation in St Helens but had to admit that he had largely ignored the committee's order.
Although between 12 and 20 houses had been converted to use the pail system, he said he had not insisted on new property that was being built in distant parts of the town adopting it.
That, he said, was on account of the great expense and trouble the removal of nightsoil from those places would entail.
The committee members gave Ross a bit of a ticking off for his failure but he then said he would need a covered van (horse-drawn, of course) to take away and empty all the pails and so the committee decided to invite tenders for one.
The streets of St Helens were then extremely dark at night and you needed to be very careful what you trod in, as there was much more than dog dirt about!
The meeting also discussed two complaints that had been made claiming compensation for clothing that had been damaged by inadvertently walking into nightsoil.
Charles Rigby had been going home a few nights before and in attempting to get to his house he had walked into a heap of human faeces from neighbouring houses that were awaiting collection by the nightsoil men.
I suppose a modern-day parallel would be households putting out their wheelie bins and recycling bags.
But with poor street lighting Rigby had been caught unawares without smelling or seeing any of it before his immersion, as the Newspaper explained:
"It did not appear that the nightsoil had given him that disagreeable notice which usually issues from it, and there was no light to reveal its presence."
Rigby's trousers and boots had got covered in the sh*t and he claimed had been ruined and a Mr Sanders also complained of experiencing the same problem in Ormskirk Street.
The committee decided that both complaints should be referred to the Town Clerk for him to sort out.
Recently it had been decided that the nightsoilmen should be issued with lights so residents could realise who they were. But it sounds like it was the nightsoil itself that required illumination.
The Health Committee was also given the latest figures on death for the month ending September 12th.
There had been 139 fatalities in St Helens of which 20 were from scarlet fever, 4 from measles, diphtheria had claimed 3 lives and diarrhoea 16.
Eighty-five of the deaths were of children under five years of age, with half of them under 12 months.
Small shops survived on giving tick to their customers who would normally pay off their debts when their husband received his weekly wage on Saturday lunchtime. But, of course, not everyone did.
In this week's Petty Sessions, Edward Poynton charged Lilly Friar with assault after she had bashed the grocer with her broom.
Mr Poynton had gone to the woman's house to seek some money that he was owed.
When Mrs Friar said she couldn't pay off her debt the grocer got angry with her, which led to the assault.
In her defence the brush-bashing Mrs Friar claimed that her violence had been justified by an "improper intent" on the part of the complainant. But she was fined five shillings and costs.
I've often commented how carters were not allowed to leave their horse and cart and – in later years – motor cars on the streets of St Helens for longer than it took to load or unload goods. That was because an obstruction might be created.
But the next case demonstrated how the rule also applied to smaller, hand-powered vehicles.
Patrick Bailey appeared in court charged with allowing his cart to stand in Bridge Street for two hours.
Although Mr Bailey admitted the offence, he said his vehicle was only a small handcart and he was just fined 1 shilling and costs.
The most serious case in my view this week concerned Margaret Bradley of Bold Street who was charged with neglecting her 9-week-old child.
Ann Barrett said Margaret and her husband lodged with her and at some time between 8am and 9am on one morning she had heard the child crying.
Upon entering the Bradleys' room, she said she found the baby on its own lying naked on some wet straw.
Mrs Barrett added that the child's mother had been out of the house for about an hour and a half.
A neighbour called Bridget Bannon gave evidence with what was reported as "manifest reluctance" and stated that on that morning Margaret had spent half-an-hour in her home.
Superintendent Ludlam asked Mrs Bannon if she was aware of the defendant's regular neglect of her child.
She said she was not but had to admit once carrying the infant to the police station to complain about lack of attention from its mother.
Dr McNicoll said that after examination of the child he had found the baby to be in an "ill condition" but not seemingly diseased.
"It has been badly cared [for], but not grossly neglected. It would certainly be injurious to leave the child an hour and a half as stated."
Sgt Eastham told the court that after being summoned to the house he had found the infant screaming on a wet bed, with the baby's hands pressed to its mouth.
The mother of the poor child, Margaret Bradley, offered no defence other than to deny that it had been left naked.
The magistrates sent the woman to prison for three weeks with her child ordered to be admitted into the workhouse.
After the woman had completed her sentence, the pair would, no doubt, have been reunited but without any supervision.
The father was only mentioned in passing as living in the lodgings with Margaret. Presumably he had been at work when his child was left alone.
As far as the authorities were concerned the husband's responsibility for his family lay in earning a living and finding them a home.
Caring for his children was the wife's responsibility and she usually was the one that carried the can when things went wrong.
St Helens Newspaper courtesy St Helens Archive Service at Eccleston Library
Next Week's stories will include Rainford's poor water supply, the pubs that had their licences removed, the movement calling for compulsory education and the giant dying of fever that still managed to visit pubs on his way to Whiston Workhouse.
The St Helens Newspaper had long published what we would call a classified section devoted to categories such as "Situations Vacant".
There was also a "For Sale" section containing expensive items that businesses wanted to be rid off, such as engines. But there was no facility for ordinary folk to flog their unwanted stuff.
However, the Newspaper of the 19th described how they would be introducing such a facility, which they were calling "Sale or Exchange Mart".
In this, they said, their readers could advertise items that they no longer wanted, such as books, ornaments, instruments etc., explaining:
"In various parts of the country the experiment has been tried and found successful. We have been requested to adopt a similar plan for this town and neighbourhood. We have therefore agreed to make the experiment, under the following regulations:-
"That descriptions of the articles to be disposed of will be inserted in this column at Sixpence each.
"If a sale or exchange is effected, a small consideration will have to be paid. Articles may remain with the owners, or be deposited at this office. The names of owners will not be given without their consent."
And what was the first item for sale or exchange in the new column? Appropriately for these violent times, it was a double-barrelled gun!
That was all the information that was provided in the ad with no details as to the age and condition of the weapon or its price.
But it was a start in what would prove a valuable means in which the St Helens public could offload their unwanted stuff.
Gun ownership, by the way, was then unregulated. That was apart from the need to buy a licence from the post office, like you would for your dog.
Last week I reported how the St Helens Chemical Company of Pocket Nook had written to the council's Health Committee denying that "any noxious matter" ever flowed from their factory into public sewers.
But the Borough Surveyor John Ross had taken samples from the sewer connected to their works and detected acid.
As a result of the firm's complete denial, this week's meeting of the committee heard that a further sample from the sewer had been taken and that had contained a much larger percentage of acid than the first sample had.
The manager of the chemical company still insisted they were not responsible – but explained how they were about to adopt a new system that would prevent "all forms of escape" from their works.
"It's not us, guv", was essentially the standard response of polluting firms when brought to book.
But the Health Committee's chairman told his members that he did not accept the denial and saw their statement of a new system being introduced as an admission of culpability.
Also in the firing line was Doulton's Pottery who had sent in a lengthy letter to the committee disputing their surveyor's report that they were polluting the sewers.
In response Mr Ross showed the committee members a map that illustrated the layout of the town's sewer system and its branches.
But in the end the matter was passed on to the Town Clerk for him to "take such course as the circumstances justify", although he felt that nothing could be done to deal with the mere running of acid into a sewer unless a nuisance could be proven.
And Dr McNicholl, the Medical Officer of Health, felt that acid in the sewers was not a nuisance unless it came into contact with other bodies to form sulphureted hydrogen.
During the discussion it was mentioned in passing that the mounds of chemical waste dumped in Langtree Street were now almost as high as those in Greenbank.
Most of that road became Jackson Street and the ugly mounds were known as the Kimmicks – as did the hills of waste off Borough Road on the edge of Greenbank.
It was pointed out that the Corporation could take action against Kurtz if the mounds were considered injurious to public health but the Jackson Street waste would not be removed for 100 years.
Last October the Health Committee had decided that all new houses built in the borough must be provided with covered ashpits and removable ashtubs, "according to the pail system".
The pail was a portable bucket that was situated in an outhouse or shed and positioned under a toilet seat.
The contents of the bucket (called nightsoil) were emptied by the local authority at night and sold off at auction for composting into fertiliser.
It was a step away from the flush toilet but a step up from unsanitary closets and middens that were then standard in St Helens.
At this week's meeting the surveyor John Ross was asked for an update on the sanitary situation in St Helens but had to admit that he had largely ignored the committee's order.
Although between 12 and 20 houses had been converted to use the pail system, he said he had not insisted on new property that was being built in distant parts of the town adopting it.
That, he said, was on account of the great expense and trouble the removal of nightsoil from those places would entail.
The committee members gave Ross a bit of a ticking off for his failure but he then said he would need a covered van (horse-drawn, of course) to take away and empty all the pails and so the committee decided to invite tenders for one.
The streets of St Helens were then extremely dark at night and you needed to be very careful what you trod in, as there was much more than dog dirt about!
The meeting also discussed two complaints that had been made claiming compensation for clothing that had been damaged by inadvertently walking into nightsoil.
Charles Rigby had been going home a few nights before and in attempting to get to his house he had walked into a heap of human faeces from neighbouring houses that were awaiting collection by the nightsoil men.
I suppose a modern-day parallel would be households putting out their wheelie bins and recycling bags.
But with poor street lighting Rigby had been caught unawares without smelling or seeing any of it before his immersion, as the Newspaper explained:
"It did not appear that the nightsoil had given him that disagreeable notice which usually issues from it, and there was no light to reveal its presence."
Rigby's trousers and boots had got covered in the sh*t and he claimed had been ruined and a Mr Sanders also complained of experiencing the same problem in Ormskirk Street.
The committee decided that both complaints should be referred to the Town Clerk for him to sort out.
Recently it had been decided that the nightsoilmen should be issued with lights so residents could realise who they were. But it sounds like it was the nightsoil itself that required illumination.
The Health Committee was also given the latest figures on death for the month ending September 12th.
There had been 139 fatalities in St Helens of which 20 were from scarlet fever, 4 from measles, diphtheria had claimed 3 lives and diarrhoea 16.
Eighty-five of the deaths were of children under five years of age, with half of them under 12 months.
Small shops survived on giving tick to their customers who would normally pay off their debts when their husband received his weekly wage on Saturday lunchtime. But, of course, not everyone did.
In this week's Petty Sessions, Edward Poynton charged Lilly Friar with assault after she had bashed the grocer with her broom.
Mr Poynton had gone to the woman's house to seek some money that he was owed.
When Mrs Friar said she couldn't pay off her debt the grocer got angry with her, which led to the assault.
In her defence the brush-bashing Mrs Friar claimed that her violence had been justified by an "improper intent" on the part of the complainant. But she was fined five shillings and costs.
I've often commented how carters were not allowed to leave their horse and cart and – in later years – motor cars on the streets of St Helens for longer than it took to load or unload goods. That was because an obstruction might be created.
But the next case demonstrated how the rule also applied to smaller, hand-powered vehicles.
Patrick Bailey appeared in court charged with allowing his cart to stand in Bridge Street for two hours.
Although Mr Bailey admitted the offence, he said his vehicle was only a small handcart and he was just fined 1 shilling and costs.
The most serious case in my view this week concerned Margaret Bradley of Bold Street who was charged with neglecting her 9-week-old child.
Ann Barrett said Margaret and her husband lodged with her and at some time between 8am and 9am on one morning she had heard the child crying.
Upon entering the Bradleys' room, she said she found the baby on its own lying naked on some wet straw.
Mrs Barrett added that the child's mother had been out of the house for about an hour and a half.
A neighbour called Bridget Bannon gave evidence with what was reported as "manifest reluctance" and stated that on that morning Margaret had spent half-an-hour in her home.
Superintendent Ludlam asked Mrs Bannon if she was aware of the defendant's regular neglect of her child.
She said she was not but had to admit once carrying the infant to the police station to complain about lack of attention from its mother.
Dr McNicoll said that after examination of the child he had found the baby to be in an "ill condition" but not seemingly diseased.
"It has been badly cared [for], but not grossly neglected. It would certainly be injurious to leave the child an hour and a half as stated."
Sgt Eastham told the court that after being summoned to the house he had found the infant screaming on a wet bed, with the baby's hands pressed to its mouth.
The mother of the poor child, Margaret Bradley, offered no defence other than to deny that it had been left naked.
The magistrates sent the woman to prison for three weeks with her child ordered to be admitted into the workhouse.
After the woman had completed her sentence, the pair would, no doubt, have been reunited but without any supervision.
The father was only mentioned in passing as living in the lodgings with Margaret. Presumably he had been at work when his child was left alone.
As far as the authorities were concerned the husband's responsibility for his family lay in earning a living and finding them a home.
Caring for his children was the wife's responsibility and she usually was the one that carried the can when things went wrong.
St Helens Newspaper courtesy St Helens Archive Service at Eccleston Library
Next Week's stories will include Rainford's poor water supply, the pubs that had their licences removed, the movement calling for compulsory education and the giant dying of fever that still managed to visit pubs on his way to Whiston Workhouse.